News
SpaceX advances reuse efforts as recovery of two boosters nearly complete
Three launches, two recoveries, two coasts
Just over two weeks ago, SpaceX accomplished its most impressive feat of cadence yet, both launching and recovering two separate Falcon 9s in approximately 49 hours.
Two weeks later and two days after conducting a third launch in 13 days, residents of Los Angeles, California and Cape Canaveral, Florida both coincidentally reported that the two recovered boosters from the previous two launches had both gone horizontal and appeared ready for transport. After docking in Port Canaveral for the second time, Core 1029 was seen entering SpaceX’s LC-39A integration facilities on Friday. The booster on the West coast, 1036, was loaded aboard one of the company’s converted Falcon 9-carrying semi-trucks, likely for transport to SpaceX’s Hawthorne manufacturing facilities, or possibly on a direct route to McGregor, Texas for refurbishment and testing.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BWQSPOgF67i/
This is exciting for several reasons. Foremost, 1036 is a likely candidate for reuse, and SES-10 sets a firm precedent for this. The first commercial reuse of an orbital-class launch vehicle, Falcon 9’s second stage and SES-10 payload launched on a first stage that had flown five months before during the successful launch of Iridium’s first ten NEXT satellites.
Given the potential impact of failure on the adoption of reuse as a commercial standard, SpaceX likely approached the refurbishment of the vehicle with an end-goal balanced between perfection and realism. The orbit of Iridium’s NEXT constellation is the reason the booster was chosen for the first operational reuse: their low Earth polar orbits require Falcon 9’s first stage to undergo a smaller amount of heating and general hypersonic battering when compared with SpaceX’s more common commercial launches of geostationary satellites.
-
- The central aluminum grid fin of 1029 features a dramatic lack of several vanes, likely melted off during the intense heat of reentry. Expending older boosters is likely helping SpaceX learn how to preserve Block 5 rockets for multiple high-energy missions. (Reddit, u/thedubya22)
-
- SpaceX will move to titanium grid fins in the future, first trialed during 1036’s launch of Iridium-2. (SpaceX)
A sound example of the extremes of Falcon 9’s suborbital reentry heating can be found in the recovery of 1029, which launched BulgariaSat-1 to a supersynchronous transfer orbit. Noted before the launch by Musk over his favored medium, 1029’s recovery was expected to be the most energetic yet, and thus success was less than certain. The results of this additional heating were obvious, and keen observers rapidly noted that the most stressed of 1029’s aluminum grid fins appeared to be considerably deformed from the stage’s energetic return to OCISLY, completed melted through in places. Considering the debut of more robust titanium grid fins aboard the launch of Iridium-2 only two days later, the quasi-destruction of one of 1029’s grid fins was somewhat fitting. 1036’s titanium grid fins looked barely worse for wear after a landing that was also deemed aggressive due to Just Read The Instructions having to avoid bad weather just before the landing.
Two weeks: BulgariaSat-1, Iridium-2, Intelsat 35e. (SpaceX)
Stirring explorations of the limits of recovery aside, both boosters are now ready to be examined and refurbished ahead of one or even two additional launches. SpaceX’s willingness to use the booster recovered from the launch of Thaicom-8 has already established that the company has a certain level of confidence in the reuse of first stages that have suffered high-velocity recoveries. Thus, 1036 is nearly certain to be reused, and 1029 has a strong chance as well.
-
- Falcon 9 1029’s lean is decidedly more extreme than the stage that launched Thaicom-8. (SpaceX)
-
- The aggressive Atlantic Ocean landing of Thaicom-8’s Falcon 9 first stage. (SpaceX)
The hot recovery of 1029 further marked the first use of a remotely-operated recovery robot aboard OCISLY, and could be seen below the leaning first stage as it entered Port Canaveral. It appears that its first use was a success, and the robot will certainly have a busy future of remotely securing first stages after landing. Remote securing and safing will both improve safety for those directly involved in on-ocean recovery, but it is also intended to expedite the process in order to ensure that OCISLY is prepared to recover Falcon 9 as often as possible. SpaceX’s recent cadence accomplishment of three launches in 13 days drives home the reality that weekly launches are readily achievable for the company, so long as there are pads available and payloads to be launched.
Weekly recoveries for an ASDS like OCISLY would be extremely time-sensitive, given the need for at least several days to simply reach the point of landing in the Pacific, and the addition of rapid robotic alternatives for operations aboard the drone ships could make such a goal more achievable. With SpaceX’s land-based landing facilities in perspective, it is easier to imagine a close future with weekly launches and landings of both Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy, and possibly the propulsive-landing Dragon 2 spacecraft further down the road.
1036 horizontal and ready for transport. (Instagram/Luka Hargett)
A symbiosis of SpaceX fans and those familiar with the metal and chemistry have also led to fans speculating that the now-standard titanium grid fins may develop a subtle, golden patina of oxygenation after many reuses. Nothing could be more picturesquely symbolic of the successes SpaceX has had in their pursuit of reusable rocketry.
News
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
For what it’s worth, as a Tesla owner, I don’t particularly see the need for CarPlay, as I have found the in-car system that the company has developed to be superior. However, many people are in love with CarPlay simply because, when it’s in a car that is capable, it is really great.
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions appeared to be dead in the water after a large amount of speculation late last year that the company would add the user interface seemed to cool down after several weeks of reports.
However, it appears that CarPlay might make its way to Tesla vehicles after all, as a recent report seems to indicate that it is still being worked on by software teams for the company.
The real question is whether it is truly needed or if it is just a want by so many owners that Tesla is listening and deciding to proceed with its development.
Back in November, Bloomberg reported that Tesla was in the process of testing Apple CarPlay within its vehicles, which was a major development considering the company had resisted adopting UIs outside of its own for many years.
Nearly one-third of car buyers considered the lack of CarPlay as a deal-breaker when buying their cars, a study from McKinsey & Co. outlined. This could be a driving decision in Tesla’s inability to abandon the development of CarPlay in its vehicles, especially as it lost a major advantage that appealed to consumers last year: the $7,500 EV tax credit.
Tesla owners propose interesting theory about Apple CarPlay and EV tax credit
Although we saw little to no movement on it since the November speculation, Tesla is now reportedly in the process of still developing the user interface. Mark Gurman, a Bloomberg writer with a weekly newsletter, stated that CarPlay is “still in the works” at Tesla and that more concrete information will be available “soon” regarding its development.
While Tesla already has a very capable and widely accepted user interface, CarPlay would still be an advantage, considering many people have used it in their vehicles for years. Just like smartphones, many people get comfortable with an operating system or style and are resistant to using a new one. This could be a big reason for Tesla attempting to get it in their own cars.
Tesla gets updated “Apple CarPlay” hack that can work on new models
For what it’s worth, as a Tesla owner, I don’t particularly see the need for CarPlay, as I have found the in-car system that the company has developed to be superior. However, many people are in love with CarPlay simply because, when it’s in a car that is capable, it is really great.
It holds one distinct advantage over Tesla’s UI in my opinion, and that’s the ability to read and respond to text messages, which is something that is available within a Tesla, but is not as user-friendly.
With that being said, I would still give CarPlay a shot in my Tesla. I didn’t particularly enjoy it in my Bronco Sport, but that was because Ford’s software was a bit laggy with it. If it were as smooth as Tesla’s UI, which I think it would be, it could be a really great addition to the vehicle.
With the launch of a new trim level for the Model Y last night, something almost went unnoticed — the loss of a moniker that Tesla just recently added to a couple of its variants of the all-electric crossover.
Tesla launched the Model Y All-Wheel-Drive last night, competitively priced at $41,990, but void of the luxurious features that are available within the Premium trims.
Upon examination of the car, one thing was missing, and it was noticeable: Tesla dropped the use of the “Standard” moniker to identify its entry-level offerings of the Model Y.
The Standard Model Y vehicles were introduced late last year, primarily to lower the entry price after the U.S. EV tax credit changes were made. Tesla stripped some features like the panoramic glass roof, premium audio, ambient lighting, acoustic-lined glass, and some of the storage.
Last night, it simply switched the configurations away from “Standard” and simply as the Model Y Rear-Wheel-Drive and Model Y All-Wheel-Drive.
There are three plausible reasons for this move, and while it is minor, there must be an answer for why Tesla chose to abandon the name, yet keep the “Premium” in its upper-level offerings.
“Standard” carried a negative connotation in marketing
Words like “Standard” can subtly imply “basic,” “bare-bones,” or “cheap” to consumers, especially when directly contrasted with “Premium” on the configurator or website. Dropping it avoids making the entry-level Model Y feel inferior or low-end, even though it’s designed for affordability.
Tesla likely wanted the base trim to sound neutral and spec-focused (e.g., just “RWD” highlights drivetrain rather than feature level), while “Premium” continues to signal desirable upgrades, encouraging upsells to higher-margin variants.
Simplifying the overall naming structure for less confusion
The initial “Standard vs. Premium” split (plus Performance) created a somewhat clunky hierarchy, especially as Tesla added more variants like Standard Long Range in some markets or the new AWD base.
Removing “Standard” streamlines things to a more straightforward progression (RWD → AWD → Premium RWD/AWD → Performance), making the lineup easier to understand at a glance. This aligns with Tesla’s history of iterative naming tweaks to reduce buyer hesitation.
Elevating brand perception and protecting perceived value
Keeping “Premium” reinforces that the bulk of the Model Y lineup (especially the popular Long Range models) remains a premium product with desirable features like better noise insulation, upgraded interiors, and tech.
Eliminating “Standard” prevents any dilution of the Tesla brand’s upscale image—particularly important in a competitive EV market—while the entry-level variants can quietly exist as accessible “RWD/AWD” options without drawing attention to them being decontented versions.
You can check out the differences between the “Standard” and “Premium” Model Y vehicles below:
@teslarati There are some BIG differences between the Tesla Model Y Standard and Tesla Model Y Premium #tesla #teslamodely ♬ Sia – Xeptemper
Elon Musk
Tesla bull sees odds rising of Tesla merger after Musk confirms SpaceX-xAI deal
Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities wrote on Tuesday that there is a growing chance Tesla could be merged in some form with SpaceX and xAI over the next 12 to 18 months.
A prominent Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) bull has stated that the odds are rising that Tesla could eventually merge with SpaceX and xAI, following Elon Musk’s confirmation that the private space company has combined with his artificial intelligence startup.
Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities wrote on Tuesday that there is a growing chance Tesla could be merged in some form with SpaceX and xAI over the next 12 to 18 months.
“In our view there is a growing chance that Tesla will eventually be merged in some form into SpaceX/xAI over time. The view is this growing AI ecosystem will focus on Space and Earth together…..and Musk will look to combine forces,” Ives wrote in a post on X.
Ives’ comments followed confirmation from Elon Musk late Monday that SpaceX has merged with xAI. Musk stated that the merger creates a vertically integrated platform that combines AI, rockets, satellite internet, communications, and real-time data.
In a post on SpaceX’s official website, Elon Musk added that the combined company is aimed at enabling space-based AI compute, stating that within two to three years, space could become the lowest-cost environment for generating AI processing power. The transaction reportedly values the combined SpaceX-xAI entity at roughly $1.25 trillion.
Tesla, for its part, has already increased its exposure to xAI, announcing a $2 billion investment in the startup last week in its Q4 and FY 2025 update letter.
While merger speculation has intensified, notable complications could emerge if SpaceX/xAI does merge with Tesla, as noted in a report from Investors Business Daily.
SpaceX holds major U.S. government contracts, including with the Department of Defense and NASA, and xAI’s Grok is being used by the U.S. Department of War. Tesla, for its part, maintains extensive operations in China through Gigafactory Shanghai and its Megapack facility.
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level
